Help with irrefutable arguments- creating dissonance

"Although I do not claim to be conversant with the teachings of every denomination or sect that calls itself "christian", I cannot name any such that do not preach God's kingdom as mankind's only hope. Can you? While it is true that as individual denominations they may not preach in as many lands as does the Watch Tower Society, in the aggregate those other denominations preach more extensively. Furthermore, the Society preaches a "different Gospel" [citation] which stands under Apostolic condemnation [citation] and therefore does not fulfill Matthew 24:14.

Yes, not one of the churches in Christendom are preaching God's kingdom as mankind's only hope. I don't feel there exists any need for me to be more specific."

| Lol... dj, I don't think you actually read what he just said here. Need some glasses?

Besides that, I noticed that you didn't provide much in the terms of scriptural backing in your arguments. I counted about, 7 scriptures. I'm sure you could find a scripture for all of them though. Just don't forget that in the bible, context is key.

Besides that, I just thought it would be appropriate at this time to examine (scapegoat) some other religions. Take for example a devout mormon. This mormon has examined his bible (with the assistance of the book of mormon) for his entire life, and has an answer to everything. He doesn't like to brag, but he likes to think of himself as a very intelligent person; smarter than your average mormon.

The important thing to this mormon is not what others think of what he believes, because they're controlled by satan. HE believes what he believes. He has had ample time to rationalize to himself the logic in what he believes, and it all makes perfect sense. You could say that this mormon, from the evidence he's gathered throughout his life (and evidence he's ignored) has the truth.Because this mormon has the truth, he will fight tooth and nail for it, sometimes even in a rather defensive tone and demeanor. After all, the bible says to make a defense for the truth, and he is sure withought doubt that he has it. God would expect nothing less of him, right?

So, I only hope you're gleaning the similarities here. I only hope you're taking an objective view to your truth and not trying to force your ideas upon others. Are you 100% sure you have it all figured out? After all, apostates are not the people who have conflicting opinions, but those who maliciously promote them; creating followers.

Going back to the mormon, he would no doubt call Jehovah's Witnesses a false religion.Does this mean he's rejecting God himself? After all, he's just stating what he personally feels he KNOWS is the truth.Does this make him an apostate of God?

All I'm wanting you to realize is that there are somewhere near 33,000 christian denominations worldwide.That's 33,000 different beliefs that are all "backed by scripture" and claim to be bible based.Every one of those belief systems most likely has scriptures to reinforce their doctrine.Every single person in each of those different belief systems feels they undoubtedly "have it right".Every single person in each of those different belief systems feels they are serving the Almighty God to the best of their ability.Every single person in each of those different belief systems feels they love the Almighty God with all of their heart.

Next, take into account those who, in an honesthearted search for "truth", have come to the conclusion that there is no God?And what about small tribes that live in the most remote areas of the world?

Does this mean that the epitome of love, Jehovah/Yaweh, is going to destroy 6,690,254,041 people, just because their honest perspective in life didn't match up?

Would you kill 6,690,254,041 imperfect people for being wrong?

Yeah, you can argue that "only Jehovah can judge those who live and who don't", but your organization says it's dependent upon those who "accept God's message", meaning their literature.

Are you telling me God doesn't want me to be skeptical?Why is skepticism of my own belief system a bad thing?Shouldn't the truth set me free?Who really preys on the gullibility of others?

The opposite of skepticism is gullibility.Are you being objective or are you just trying to cite evidence to back your beliefs because you know they're the truth?Don't forget, the mormon would do exactly the same thing.Why else would a mormon believe those things, if he wasn't presented with "evidence" and scriptures?

Although I do not claim to be conversant with the teachings of every denomination or sect that calls itself "christian", I cannot name any such that do not preach God's kingdom as mankind's only hope. Can you? While it is true that as individual denominations they may not preach in as many lands as does the Watch Tower Society, in the aggregate those other denominations preach more extensively. Furthermore, the Society preaches a "different Gospel" [citation] which stands under Apostolic condemnation [citation] and therefore does not fulfill Matthew 24:14.

@djeggnog wrote:

Yes, not one of the churches in Christendom are preaching God's kingdom as mankind's only hope. I don't feel there exists any need for me to be more specific.

@confliction wrote:

Lol... dj, I don't think you actually read what he just said here. Need some glasses? Besides that, I noticed that you didn't provide much in the terms of scriptural backing in your arguments. I counted about, 7 scriptures. I'm sure you could find a scripture for all of them though. Just don't forget that in the bible, context is key.

You're right. @bennyk used a double negative, so that I now realize that I missed the point that he was making entirely. Thanks for pointing that out.

If counting scriptures is what you want to do, then, by all means, count them. I didn't feel any need to use many scriptures in my post. You can use as many as you wish in your posts without any complaint from me. I'm not here to preach to anyone here. I'm here to discuss what topic I feel moved to join and maybe I might engage someone in a discussion.

Besides that, I just thought it would be appropriate at this time to examine (scapegoat) some other religions. Take for example a devout mormon. This mormon has examined his bible (with the assistance of the book of mormon) for his entire life, and has an answer to everything. He doesn't like to brag, but he likes to think of himself as a very intelligent person; smarter than your average mormon.

The Mormon might have an answer, the same as a Baptist or a Seventh-Day Adventist or a Muslim or an adherent of Judaism might have an answer. Devout or not, they are all of them, I believe, living their lives in a state of spiritual darkness.

The important thing to this mormon is not what others think of what he believes, because they're controlled by satan. HE believes what he believes. He has had ample time to rationalize to himself the logic in what he believes, and it all makes perfect sense. You could say that this mormon, from the evidence he's gathered throughout his life (and evidence he's ignored) has the truth. Because this mormon has the truth, he will fight tooth and nail for it, sometimes even in a rather defensive tone and demeanor. After all, the bible says to make a defense for the truth, and he is sure [without a] doubt that he has it. God would expect nothing less of him, right?

It doesn't matter what the Mormon believes to be true; if he or she should believe Joseph Smith to have been a true prophet of God, that Smith was given some golden plates by an angel named Moroni and that Smith was given the power to translate the writing on these plates, that would be his or her "truth," but not the truth as I know the Bible to be, so he or she may well fight "tooth and nail" to defend it, but so what?

So, I only hope you're gleaning the similarities here. I only hope you're taking an objective view to your truth and not trying to force your ideas upon others. Are you 100% sure you have it all figured out?

I'm 100% sure that I know the truth that has been revealed to us so far through our study of the Bible, and I do not care to force my ideas upon anyone, but to share them with those interested in hearing them. BTW, I know how to overlook zany teachings that have nothing to do with Bible truth, like I don't take Russell's pyramid seriously, but I recognize his love and zeal for God, and I also recognize that God chose to use Russell the same as He used Cyrus to obtain a release for His exiled people and used Alexander to give Tyre its comeuppance.

Going back to the mormon, he would no doubt call Jehovah's Witnesses a false religion. Does this mean he's rejecting God himself? After all, he's just stating what he personally feels he KNOWS is the truth. Does this make him an apostate of God?

No, an apostate is someone that had once been enlightened. For your convenience, here's a passage: Hebrews 6:4-6.

All I'm wanting you to realize is that there are somewhere near 33,000 christian denominations worldwide. That's 33,000 different beliefs that are all "backed by scripture" and claim to be bible based. Every one of those belief systems most likely has scriptures to reinforce their doctrine. Every single person in each of those different belief systems feels they undoubtedly "have it right". Every single person in each of those different belief systems feels they are serving the Almighty God to the best of their ability. Every single person in each of those different belief systems feels they love the Almighty God with all of their heart.

Who was it now that sowed that field in Jesus' parable with these "33,000" weeds? Here's a hint: Matthew 13:24, 28, 39. The point I would make is that just because a doctrine might be

Bible based" or "backed by Scripture" doesn't make the religion true, for clearly there is only one faith, which logically means that 32,999 of these faiths must be false.

Next, take into account those who, in an honesthearted search for "truth", have come to the conclusion that there is no God?

Then wouldn't they as well as these honest-hearted believers in evolution all just be fools? I mean, what excuse would they have for believing there is no God? Or maybe natural selection does explain how the very first self-replicating cell (equipped with DNA) came to exist so no real need exists for a Creator-God?

And what about small tribes that live in the most remote areas of the world?

What about them?

Does this mean that the epitome of love, [Jehovah/Yahweh], is going to destroy 6,690,254,041 people, just because their honest perspective in life didn't match up?

No; these "6,690,254,041" people are going to be destroyed because God's patience ran its course and no one could ever accuse Jehovah of not extending mercy to at least some of the human family who would have been among the dead were it not for His merciful provision of the ransom. You see, not everyone is going to be saved.

Remember an ancient world perished back in 2370 BC, and all but eight people survived the destruction of that world. Maybe Noah missed some of those folks that were drowned to death for a time, but he got over it, and those mourning over the deaths of these 6,690,254,041 will eventually get over it as well. For your convenience, here's a verse: Isaiah 65:17.

Would you kill 6,690,254,041 imperfect people for being wrong?

Yes, I would, considering the fact that these "6,690,254,041 people were already dead to me. For your convenience, here's a verse: John 3:18.

Yeah, you can argue that "only Jehovah can judge those who live and who don't", but your organization says it's dependent upon those who "accept God's message", meaning their literature.

God's message today is still what Jesus and his apostles preached, namely, the good news of the kingdom of God, except now we are preaching that God's heavenly kingdom has now been established, and that people of all nations are both learning God's righteousness and how to put up with the shortcomings of one another. Our literature contains miniature sermons that merely explain God's message to folks that are interested in understanding what things the Bible says, and it lets folks know that God's focus in these last days has been on the ingathering of the great crowd of "other sheep" as to whether they are serving God day and night in his spiritual temple.

Are you telling me God doesn't want me to be skeptical?

I don't think Jehovah minds.

Why is skepticism of my own belief system a bad thing?

I don't believe I said that it was a bad thing for you to be skeptical of what things you believe.

Shouldn't the truth set me free?

The truth set me free were all of the falsehoods, religious or otherwise, to which many of the people with whom I speak daily continue to be in bondage, but perhaps you learned after a few years of studying the Bible with Jehovah's Witnesses that you had no real interest in the truth. I've no problem with that.

Who really preys on the gullibility of others?

Wicked people for the most part. Why do you ask?

The opposite of skepticism is gullibility.

Is it? Does skepticism have an opposite? The skeptic might be like the apostle Thomas, who wants to see a thing because he or she accepts it as being true, but gullibility cannot be skepticism's opposite, for anyone said to be gullible believes everything, even the incredible, that he or she is told is true, whereas I, for example, am more like the skeptic, questioning everything, but believe what is credible. What am I?

Are you being objective or are you just trying to cite evidence to back your beliefs because you know they're the truth? Don't forget, the mormon would do exactly the same thing.

I'm usually objective, but I can be subjective at times. We're here talking about truth though, right, where subjectivity has no place. Is there a point you wish to make? If so, then please make it because, quite frankly, as I read your post here, you are coming off to me here as if I were conversing with a teenager.

Why else would a mormon believe those things, if he wasn't presented with "evidence" and scriptures?

You are going to have to ask a Mormon that question. Because I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses and not a Mormon, I think you question would best be posed to someone that is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

@djeggnogThe Mormon might have an answer, the same as a Baptist or a Seventh-Day Adventist or a Muslim or an adherent of Judaism might have an answer. Devout or not, they are all of them, I believe, living their lives in a state of spiritual darkness.

Is this an objective answer, or an opinionated answer? Have you fully learned the teachings of Latter-day saints? What about Muslims or baptists? Have you been completely through the runs to know what they're teaching is wrong? Or do you tend to only focus on their imperfections, and justify that as a means to disprove them as having divine backing? After all, they don't see themselves as being in spiritual darkness, just like you. Mormons can scripturally back up their teachings, and can also apply scriptures we use to the faithful slave and direct them at John Smith too. John smith's revelations provide them with "food at the proper time", and John Smith's interpretation of the bible sounds "credible" once you study with them.

It doesn't matter what the Mormon believes to be true; if he or she should believe Joseph Smith to have been a true prophet of God, that Smith was given some golden plates by an angel named Moroni and that Smith was given the power to translate the writing on these plates, that would be his or her "truth," but not the truth as I know the Bible to be, so he or she may well fight "tooth and nail" to defend it, but so what?

But Russell had a divine connection with God and Jesus, and over time the scriptures revealed to him the truth of the bible. After all, he said that he was God's mouthpiece, and that he was essentially given divine power to interpret the bible. The same would also apply to the Governing body today. This would no doubt be credible to you, no? And you are fighting tooth and nail right now, by continuing arguments on a website you're advised through your very own spiritual head to not even have visited, let alone partake of.

I'm 100% sure that I know the truth that has been revealed to us so far through our study of the Bible, and I do not care to force my ideas upon anyone, but to share them with those interested in hearing them. BTW, I know how to overlook zany teachings that have nothing to do with Bible truth, like I don't take Russell's pyramid seriously, but I recognize his love and zeal for God, and I also recognize that God chose to use Russell the same as He used Cyrus to obtain a release for His exiled people and used Alexander to give Tyre its comeuppance.

The fruits of objectivity do not yield absolute certainty. But I do believe you should be commended. To overlook the erroneous doctrinal reputation of an organization that claims to be (passively) divinely operated takes.... faith. What happened to your skepticism?Don't you think Joseph Smith had love and zeal for God? Why would he write such a meticulously crafted book to teach other's his God-given restoration of biblical truth? Couldn't his experience be related to the same as Cyrus, or Alexander? Joseph's doctrinal errors couldn't possible be because he was in spiritual darkness, could it? It had to be human error. After all, he's not perfect, just as other's used by God, such as moses, but he says he was used by God to interpret the scriptures through the book of mormon, so- why not?

No, an apostate is someone that had once been enlightened. For your convenience, here's a passage: Hebrews 6:4-6.So what of those who honestly feel they're rejecting an Organizational Cult, and haven't actually been enlightened?The society deems them apostate, don't they. I'm sorry but I didn't ask for your opinion, I asked your spiritual head's opinion.So you justify visiting this site because you feel we aren't apostate? So, I'm sure we could have this conversation over the internetIn the plain view of your elder-buddies, right? I'm sure they'll feel the same way, as well as all the bethelites and pioneers.You don't think you're disobeying God's organization here on earth, so why not? You wouldn't get into trouble...

Who was it now that sowed that field in Jesus' parable with these "33,000" weeds? Here's a hint: Matthew 13:24, 28, 39. The point I would make is that just because a doctrine might be Bible based" or "backed by Scripture" doesn't make the religion true, for clearly there is only one faith, which logically means that 32,999 of these faiths must be false.

Well, I never used the word "weeds" to describe 33,000 religions that claim to be tried and true. So the fact that a religion is solidly based on scripture and claims to be bible based means nothing to you? Interesting.Then wouldn't they as well as these honest-hearted believers in evolution all just be fools? I mean, what excuse would they have for believing there is no God? Or maybe natural selection does explain how the very first self-replicating cell (equipped with DNA) came to exist so no real need exists for a Creator-God?

Wow, I had literally laughed- you're good at jokes! first off, your comment shows a complete lack of understanding and appreciation of the sciences. The process of natural selection has absolutely nothing to do with the formation of self replicating cells. Try raising your IQ and going to college if it's all too hard for you to understand and you'd rather just use creation as an excuse. While we're on it, this creator sure does seem to have a bloodlust, doesn't he? I mean, killing 6,690,254,041 people because they didn't know better? Where's the love that he consists of? Surely if he know how the human brain functions, he would know that misunderstanding can affect a person's decision making, and that it was merely a defect, caused by imperfection, would he not? Surely he wouldn't doom someone to be destroyed in a rain of fire due to a lack of intelligence, or reasoning ability, would he? Adam and eve didn't have an excuse because they were perfect, but what about all of us now? He's going to destroy me for being a product of inferiority? I can almost feel the warmth and loving kindness your God Jehovah has for me :).

"No; these "6,690,254,041" people are going to be destroyed because God's patience ran its course and no one could ever accuse Jehovah of not extending mercy to at least some of the human family who would have been among the dead were it not for His merciful provision of the ransom. You see, not everyone is going to be saved.

Remember an ancient world perished back in 2370 BC, and all but eight people survived the destruction of that world. Maybe Noah missed some of those folks that were drowned to death for a time, but he got over it, and those mourning over the deaths of these 6,690,254,041 will eventually get over it as well. For your convenience, here's a verse: Isaiah 65:17.

Would you kill 6,690,254,041 imperfect people for being wrong?

Yes, I would, considering the fact that these "6,690,254,041 people were already dead to me. For your convenience, here's a verse: John 3:18."

So God can get impatient with people? That makes it okay to kill his own creation- a manifestation of his own image and likeness? And what about Jehovah extending mercy? Don't the Mormon's believe they are providing that? And what about the other 32,999 christian faiths, including yourself? Aren't you all claiming to be nothing more than a safe haven for those who want God's mercy? Those who confess their sins and pray daily- dead to god? Just for not knowing?

As to the rest of your justification of divine genocide, I can only be appalled to think that I used to believe this. It's probably the most offensive thing I could probably say to someone.People who were searching for the truth when the end comes- dead.Babies of those who said "I have my own religion" at the door- dead.

So you're telling me that you would put a gun to my head right now, and because you "gave me a chance" to understand you, even though I didn't get it, you would pull the trigger?

And you call yourself and your God Jehovah loving?

Why don't we stone fornicators, cut the skin off our penises and smash our children's heads into walls while we're at it? The bible advocates it.

God's message today is still what Jesus and his apostles preached, namely, the good news of the kingdom of God, except now we are preaching that God's heavenly kingdom has now been established, and that people of all nations are both learning God's righteousness and how to put up with the shortcomings of one another. Our literature contains miniature sermons that merely explain God's message to folks that are interested in understanding what things the Bible says, and it lets folks know that God's focus in these last days has been on the ingathering of the great crowd of "other sheep" as to whether they are serving God day and night in his spiritual temple.

Well I agree that the preaching work is vital, but let's not forget that preaching doesn't imply going door to door, or sharing watchtower's and awakes on the street. After all, jesus himself, as well as his disciples, used nothing but the bible. What's so wrong with it today that we must mandatorily use a publication in assistance to the bible, to interpret it (like the book of mormon)?After all if you're not studying JW teachings without a publication, then you can't count it as a true bible study.Doesn't every other cultic religion feel the same way? They're just separating true believers from those that are "imitation".Yet, I understand that their seperation work is void because their religion is false from your standpoint. I guess I'll move on.

I don't believe I said that it was a bad thing for you to be skeptical of what things you believe.

If I ask too many questions with the elders, I will be marked. Again, I didn't ask for what you said, I am asking what your spiritual head and advising organizaton says.

The truth set me free were all of the falsehoods, religious or otherwise, to which many of the people with whom I speak daily continue to be in bondage, but perhaps you learned after a few years of studying the Bible with Jehovah's Witnesses that you had no real interest in the truth. I've no problem with that.

I have been born and raised as a Witness, have spoken and associated with many Bethelites, Pioneers, Missionaries, Circuit Overseers, and of course, elders. My own father is a Ministerial Servant; my mother, a pioneer. I have been a baptized brother since the age of 13, and I have pioneered and have studied watchtower literature for my entire life. Don't try playing ad-hominem attacks on me- that's a low blow, and I'm suprised you would resort to attempting character assassination as a basis for justifying your arguments.

Are the "religious falsehoods" false because you only want to see them as false, through the eyes of the Watchtower, or have you given them a real opputunity as being credible doctrine, and if so, how? Do you do the opposite process for yourself?

Who really preys on the gullibility of others?

Wicked people for the most part. Why do you ask?

Why are we encouraged to take advantage of sharing the "kindom message" with people at their weakest moments in life? Isn't that what cults do? Try hard to appeal to a person's emotions... getting them at their weakest (gullible) moments helps circumvent logic, does it not?

Is it? Does skepticism have an opposite? The skeptic might be like the apostle Thomas, who wants to see a thing because he or she accepts it as being true, but gullibility cannot be skepticism's opposite, for anyone said to be gullible believes everything, even the incredible, that he or she is told is true, whereas I, for example, am more like the skeptic, questioning everything, but believe what is credible. What am I?

Well I appreciate that you recognized a grey-area in logic. It is true that there can be people with a tendency to gravitate towards skepticism, and others who are more gullible. I was simply stating that these two, in a totalitarian sense, are opposites of each other, as much as white is opposite of black. You are reading too much into what I have said- excessively eager to disprove me. Now, the light has just gotten brighter on this matter concerning skepticism and gullibility. Are you keeping up with the light?

I'm usually objective, but I can be subjective at times. We're here talking about truth though, right, where subjectivity has no place. Is there a point you wish to make? If so, then please make it because, quite frankly, as I read your post here, you are coming off to me here as if I were conversing with a teenager.

And you are right. Fun fact: Josiah became king at age 8. What difference does it make to Jehovah how old I am? None.

You are going to have to ask a Mormon that question. Because I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses and not a Mormon, I think you question would best be posed to someone that is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Apparently, you either didn't recognise, or chose to ignore the insinuation and inferences I was making by using a third-person illustration.But that doesn't matter- I'll save it for another time.

You have a wonderful day dj- I hope armageddon comes soon to kill everyone on earth so you can enjoy paradise earth- I hear it's getting closer every day.